Mapping deontic operators to abductive expectations

被引：16

作者：

Alberti M. ^{[1
]}

Gavanelli M. ^{[1
]}

Lamma E. ^{[1
]}

Mello P. ^{[2
]}

Sartor G. ^{[2
]}

Torroni P. ^{[3
]}

机构：

[1] ENDIF, Università di Ferrara, 44100 Ferrara

[2] DEIS, Università di Bologna, 40136 Bologna

[3] CIRSFID, Università di Bologna, 40100 Bologna

来源：

Comput. Math. Organ. Theory | 2006年 / 2-3 SPEC. ISS.卷 / 205-225期

关键词：

Abduction; Deontic logic; Normative systems; Semantics;

D O I：

10.1007/s10588-006-9544-8

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

Deontic concepts and operators have been widely used in several fields where representation of norms is needed, including legal reasoning and normative multi-agent systems. The EU-funded SOCS project has provided a language to specify the agent interaction in open multi-agent systems. The language is equipped with a declarative semantics based on abductive logic programming, and an operational semantics consisting of a (sound and complete) abductive proof procedure. In the SOCS framework, the specification is used directly as a program for the verification procedure. In this paper, we propose a mapping of the usual deontic operators (obligations, prohibition, permission) to language entities, called expectations, available in the SOCS social framework. Although expectations and deontic operators can be quite different from a philosophical viewpoint, we support our mapping by showing a similarity between the abductive semantics for expectations and the Kripke semantics that can be given to deontic operators. The main purpose of this work is to make the computational machinery from the SOCS social framework available for the specification and verification of systems by means of deontic operators. © Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2006.

引用

页码：205 / 225

页数：20

共 39 条

[31]

Noriega P., Sierra C., Institutions in perspective: An extended abstract, 6th International Workshop CIA-2002 on Cooperative Information Agents (Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence), 2446, (2002)

[32]

Prakken H., Sergot M., Contrary-to-duty obligations, Studia Logica, 57, 1, pp. 91-115, (1996)

[33]

Ryu Young U., Lee Ronald M., Defeasible Deontic Reasoning: A Logic Programming Model, Deontic Logic in Computer Science: Normative System Specification, pp. 225-241, (1993)

[34]

Sadri F., Stathis K., Toni F., Normative KGP agents: A Preliminary Report, (2005)

[35]

Sartor G., Legal Reasoning, 5, (2004)

[36]

Societies of computeeS (SOCS): A computational logic model for the description, analysis and verification of global and open societies of heterogeneous computees, (2002)

[37]

van der Torre L., Contextual Deontic Logic: Normative Agents, Violations and Independence, Ann Math Art Intell, 37, 1, pp. 33-63, (2003)

[38]

van der Torre L.W.N., Tan Y.-H., Diagnosis and Decision Making in Normative Reasoning, Artif. Intell. Law, 7, 1, pp. 51-67, (1999)

[39]

Wright G.H., Deontic logic, Mind, 60, pp. 1-15, (1951)

← 1 2 3 4 →